New
#1
HDD Size...
I have wondered for a long time now, why does a "160 HDD" only got 149 GB of space?And a 320 GB, only got 298? Why doesnt it just say "150 GB HDD" and "300 GB HDD" then?
Or is there an explanation why?
- Sergio
HDD Size...
-
-
New #2
There's an explanation. It has to do with decimal format, which we usually read, and binary, which the computer reads. There's a ratio for it, (1000/1024 = .9765625) but this thread here pretty much explains it out.
Hard Drive Size being reported wrong in Windows
-
New #3
Its also to do with the cache size. For instance if you buy a Samsung F1 1Tb 32mb, thats 32mb taken off straight away for caching.
Once you install Windows then its further reduced with NTFS data and MTF data.
-
New #4
Well yes, but you're not going to see a 10 plus gigabyte loss with the cache though. It's also good for manufuaturer's/sellers, as you think you're getting a bigger capacity size, when in actuality it will be reduced based on the ratio.
Then you have system restore gobbling up even more GB day by day, based upon the size you have allocated for it, the rate of points it makes, or even if you have it enabled. But that's easy to get back by deleting your restore points.
-
New #5
i had always looked for this explanation. the above posts explains it all. Thanks Aaron and Swarfega.
Edit:i like this one.Would you want to buy a hard drive that is labeled as 2^35 byte hard drive? Or would you rather see a 500Gb drive?
-
New #6
Just a lot of "gibberish", isn't it?There's an explanation. It has to do with decimal format, which we usually read, and binary, which the computer reads. There's a ratio for it, (1000/1024 = .9765625) but this thread here pretty much explains it out.
Hard Drive Size being reported wrong in Windows
-
-
New #8
Sorry but I'm a little confused
I can't see the link between Cache and disk capacity, The Cache is an amount of RAM used to buffer the data from the processor to the drive to allow for the relatively slow mechanical nature of the drive
Nothing major but I was unaware of any mirroring of the cache with actual disk space
-
New #9
What...my answer or the link I posted?
Here, I'll do the math, it's simple.
(Used the wrong ratio in my original post there) This one for GB (0.9313226)
You've got a 320GB HDD, which only shows 298GB right?
Just take
320 multiplied by 0.9313226 = 298GB
160GB
160 multiplied by 0.9313226 = 149GB
-
New #10
Hi Swarfega,
I'm sorry man, but you are mixing up a few things in your post.
First, the 32mb cache is a separate memory chip on the disk's controller,
it has nothing to do with the space on the platters.
The loss of space by MTF, and NTFS cluster size is also a different matter,
because it will only reflect on the amount of free/used space, not the disk size.
The one and only reason for the difference in size is this:
Let's take a disk that the manufacturer claims has 160 Gbyte.
The real size of the disk is 160.000.000.000 Bytes.
The manufacturer takes off the zeros leaving 160 Gbyte.
They actually divide it three times by a 1000, but that's a sales trick.
They should divide it three times by 1024
160.000.000.000 bytes (/1024) = 156.250.000 Kbytes
156.250.000 Kbytes (/1024) = 152.587 Mbytes
152.587 Mbytes (/1024) = 149 Gbytes
So:
160.000.000.000 bytes = 149Gb
That's why 160 Gb in the shop = 149 Gb in your computer.
It's a rip off. Nothing more nothing less.
It dates back to the floppy days, but with disks growing bigger, the difference gets worse and worse.
A so called 1TB disk in fact only has 931 Gbytes.
That's 69Gb less,
That's a very nice Win7 partition worth of space.
Or 15 full quality DVD films,
Or 108 wav quality CD rips,
Or 15.700 average MP3's at highest quality.
Quote
Related Discussions